1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to bus management. In particular, the present invention relates to the behavior of border nodes within a high performance serial bus system.
2. Background
Modern electronic equipment has greatly enhanced the quality of our lives. However, as the use of such equipment has increased, so has the need to connect equipment purchased from different manufacturers. For example, while a computer and a digital camera may each be useful when used alone, the ability to connect the digital camera to the computer and exchange information between the two makes the combination even more useful. Therefore, a need was apparent for a serial bus standard that would allow for the connection and communication between such devices.
The IEEE 1394-1995 standard was developed to satisfy this need. This standard revolutionized the consumer electronics industry by providing a serial bus management system that featured high speeds and the ability to “hot” connect equipment to the bus; that is, the ability to connect equipment without first turning off the existing connected equipment. Since its adoption, the IEEE 1394-1995 standard has begun to see acceptance in the marketplace with many major electronics and computer manufacturers providing IEEE 1394-1995 connections on equipment that they sell.
However, as technologies improved, the need to update the IEEE 1394-1995 standard became apparent. Two new standards are being proposed at the time of the filing of this application, herein referred to as the proposed IEEE 1394a, or P1394a standard, and the proposed IEEE 1394b, or P1394b standard. Improvements such as higher speeds and longer connection paths will be provided.
In the discussion that follows, it will be necessary to distinguish between the various standards that are being proposed as of the date of this application. Additionally, it will be necessary to distinguish hardware and packet transmissions that are compatible with the P1394b standard and not earlier standards.
Thus, the term “Legacy” will be used herein to refer to the IEEE 1394-1995 standard and all supplements thereof prior to the P1394b standard. Thus, for example, a Legacy node refers to a node compatible with the IEEE 1394-1995 standard and all supplements thereof up to, but not including, the P1394b standard.
Additionally, packets of data will be referred to herein depending on the context the packets are in. For example, a packet of data that is compatible with the P1394b standard and is travelling through a PHY compatible with the P1394b standard will be referred to as Beta format packets. Packets of data that are compatible with the Legacy standard but are travelling through a PHY compatible with the P1394b standard will be referred to as Legacy format packets. Finally, packets of data that are compatible with the Legacy format and are travelling across a data strobe link will be referred to as Alpha format packets.
Furthermore, in the discussion that follows PHYs that are compatible with the P1394b standard may be referred to in various ways, depending upon the context the PHY is operating in and the capability of the PHY. For example, a PHY that has circuitry compatible with the P1394b standard but not any previous standards will be referred to as a B only PHY. Also, a PHY that is compatible with the P1394b standard and is directly attached with only devices compatible with the P1394b standard will be referred to as B PHYs. Finally, a PHY that is communicating with both Legacy devices and devices compatible with the P1394b standard will be referred to as a border device, border PHY, or border node.
Finally, a communications systems that has only B PHYs attached will be referred to as a B bus.
Data transmission in Legacy Systems
One area that has been improved in the P1394b standard is in the way that data transmission takes place on the bus.
FIG. 1 is a prior art example of a Alpha format data packet 100 according to Legacy specifications. In the Legacy specifications, a data packet will begin with the transmission of a Data Prefix (“DP”) identifier, shown as DP 102 in FIG. 1. Importantly, in the Legacy specification, a DP must have a duration of no less than 140 nanoseconds (ns), though a DP may be of any greater length.
Typically, a DP is followed by the transmission of clocked data, known as the payload, shown as clocked data 104 in FIG. 1. On a Legacy bus, the payload will be clocked at a rate of 100 Megabits per second (Mb/s), 200 Mb/s, or 400 Mb/s. These data rates are known as S100, S200, and S400, respectively.
Finally, the payload is followed by a Data End (“DE”), shown as DE 106 in FIG. 1. In the Legacy specifications, a DE must be at least 240 ns in length.
As is appreciated by one of ordinary skill in the art, the Legacy specifications thus define a timer-based system, where data transmission begins and ends according to a fixed timer.
Compatibility Issues in Legacy Systems
As mentioned above, there are three clocked data rates present in Legacy systems, S100, S200, and S400. Initially, when the IEEE 1394-1995 standard was introduced, devices could only communicate at the S100 rate. Later, devices were introduced that communicated at the S200 and S400 rates.
One problem that occurred in the prior art was how to insure compatibility between the various devices on the market that were communicating at these different rates.
FIG. 2 illustrates such a compatibility problem. FIG. 2 has three nodes, nodes #0, #1, and #2. Node #2, the root node in this example, wishes to communicate with node #1. As is indicated in FIG. 2, nodes #1 and #2 are capable of communicating at the S400 data rate, while node #0 is only capable of communication at the lower S100 rate.
FIG. 3 illustrates the prior art solution of speed filtering on a Legacy bus. FIG. 3 shows root node #2 transmitting S400 data in packet P1 to node #1. In the prior art, to prevent node #0 from receiving the S400 data that it cannot understand, it is “shielded” from such data by having root node #2 transmit a null packet P2 to it.
In the FIG. 3 Packet Detail illustration, packets P1 and P2 are shown together on a common time axis. Packet P1 comprises a DP 300, S400 data 302, and a DE 304. Null packet P2 comprises a DP 306, and a DE 308. As is appreciated by one of ordinary skill in the art, the null packet accomplishes its shielding by extending the DP for the amount of time required to send S400 data 302. As is known by those of ordinary skill in the art, on a Legacy bus all nodes must remain synchronized in their interpretation of idle time. Thus, the null packet effectively ‘busies’ node #0 while root node #2 transmits S400 data to node #1 and thus shields node #0 from speeds it cannot understand.
Data Transmission in P1394b
FIG. 4 is a representation of the prior art data packet structure according to the P1394b standard. As is known by those of ordinary skill in the art, P1394b utilizes a packet structure that is scaled to speed unlike the fixed timer system utilized in Legacy standards. Specifically, the packet structure in P1394b is based upon symbols, rather than the fixed intervals found in the Legacy standards.
In FIG. 4, a typical prior art packet 400 of P1394b data is shown. As is known by those of ordinary skill in the art, a data packet begins in P1394b with the transmission of at least two packet starting symbols. In this example, a Speed Code symbol Sb1 and a Data Prefix symbol DP1 are shown as the packet starting symbols. Then, P1394b data bytes B1 through Bn are transmitted. Bytes B1 through Bn may be referred to herein as the payload. Finally, the transmission of data is terminated by transmitting DE symbols DE1 and DE2.
Compatibility Problems Between P1394b and Legacy Nodes and Clouds
FIG. 5 shows a data communications system comprising both P1394b and Legacy devices. This type of system will be referred to herein as a “hybrid” system. FIG. 5 shows a Legacy node #0 connected to Legacy node #4, forming what is known as an “Legacy cloud” of Legacy nodes.
Legacy node #4 is connected to border node #3. Border node #3 is connected to B PHYs #1 and #2, forming what is known as a “Beta cloud” of border and B PHYs.
One problem encountered with systems containing both Legacy and P1394b compliant nodes is how to ensure that the newer P1394b PHYs know that there are older Legacy devices present on the bus. Hence there is a need for a method to determine the existence of a hybrid bus such as that of FIG. 5.
Furthermore, given a hybrid bus, there is a need to establish one border node as the senior border node within a given cloud. Furthermore, given a hybrid system with many clouds, there is a need to establish one border node from each cloud as a senior border node.
Another problem raised by the configuration of FIG. 5 is that of arbitration on a hybrid bus. As is known by those of ordinary skill in the art, the Legacy standard employs a single request type for both asynchronous and isochronous arbitration. The first request to be received by the root is granted immediately, and all other requests are denied and required to be withdrawn. P1394b, however, uses a pipelined arbitration system, pipelining requests for both the asynchronous and isochronous bus phases. Thus the BOSS node, which is responsible for granting arbitration requests in P1394b, nominally must be aware of the phase of the bus in order to properly grant arbitration requests.
However, there may be a case where the BOSS node is unaware of when the bus enters into an isochronous phase. For example, this may happen when there are no isochronous-aware nodes within the Beta cloud that the BOSS is in, while a Legacy cloud is introducing an isochronous request into the Beta cloud. In these cases, the nodes in the Beta cloud will continue to assume that the phase of the bus is asynchronous, and the grant for the Legacy isochronous request may be handled incorrectly. Therefore, there is a need for an arbitration protocol for properly handling arbitration requests throughout multiple clouds.
Another problem raised by the configuration shown in FIG. 5 is that of managing the timers required by the Legacy standard. As mentioned above, the Legacy standard requires that bus protocols occur according to a gap timer-based system, whereas the P1394b standard abandons the timers in favor of a symbol-based system.
Border devices already contain the necessary logic to manage gap timers, since by definition border nodes have Legacy compatible ports. However, B only devices do not contain the circuitry necessary to manage timers according to the Legacy standard. Therefore, there is a need for a protocol for freeing B only devices of the gap timer requirements and transferring this responsibility to border nodes, thus freeing B only devices from the requirement of having gap timer logic built in.
Another issue raised by the hybrid system shown in FIG. 5 is what happens if the bus fails. As is known by those of ordinary skill in the art, occasionally an acknowledge or a grant can be lost in the system, throwing the system into a “race” state, whereby no device is in charge of the system. In other words, a condition can occur where no device knows the current state of the system. Currently, there exists no protocol for a hybrid bus to prevent or cure race conditions. Hence, there is a need for a protocol to allow a hybrid bus to return to a known state.
A final issue concerning the system of FIG. 5 is related to what is known as “quiet times” in the Legacy standard. As is known by those of ordinary skill in the art, in order to arbitrate for control of the bus, a Legacy node must sometimes wait for a subaction or arbitration reset gap to occur. However, in order to ensure that all nodes on the bus see the same subaction or arbitration reset gap, hysteresis is built into the process by making a node wait an additional period known as an “arb_delay” before arbitrating. This arb_delay guarantees that in a worst case round-trip scenario across the bus, every node has seen the subaction gap or the arbitration gap. The period comprising the subaction gap plus the arb_delay is known as quiet time #1, and the period comprising the arbitration reset gap plus the arb_delay is known as quiet time #2, and no arbitration requests may be made during either quiet time.
There is a danger in a hybrid bus of a B PHY granting requests during this quiet time. Currently, there is no protocol for insuring that B PHYs do not interfere with Legacy arbitration timing schemes, other than forcing B PHYs to adhere to Legacy standards, which is undesirable since the performance gains inherent in the P1394b standard are lost. Hence, there is a need for a protocol that allows the coexistence of Legacy and P1394b arbitration in a hybrid bus.